National White House Unveils Proposals to Reduce Gun Violence at Schools

[DB is Here]

Allegedly DJT is working for free but must take $1 to meet federal due consideration provisions.

Don't get me wrong, I'm for most of what's he's doing.

 

[Provincial]

LOL...Only in America will we spend $700,000,000.00 to get someone a $400,000.00 job.

That's because about half of the $700 million was spent to keep the other person out of the job!

 

[etrain16]

Some questions I think are worth considering in the whole NRA funding Trump debate:

1. When did the NRA start spending $$ on the campaign? Before or after he was declared as the Republican nominee? I suspect it was after, but having trouble confirming if that was the case.

2. If it was after, then I wonder, what was the NRA to do? Stay out of the race altogether? At that point, there were no other candidates to back that had an actual chance to win. It was going to be Hillary or Trump, period. So do they support Hillary, or Trump?

3. Is the money truly spent in support of Trump? Or in opposition to Hillary? Either way, the $$ flowing toward Hillary's side at least matched, or as I have heard well exceeded that of Trump's side.

4. Would we have been better of with Hillary as President? Some seem to think so. And if so, does anyone really believe the do-nothing Republicans in congress would have held both houses for her first 4 years? I'm willing to bet it would be going D regardless of the President is - and then we've got 2 unrestrained years of anti-gun Hillary trying to turn us into Australia.

Fact is, the stuff Trump said was just that, words. Most of what's being proposed is far less drastic than folks here and elsewhere led us to believe. The 2nd amendment stands. The question is how much do we lose this time around? Since the Republicans in congress and in some states (FL) are caving, the sole responsibility for this isn't on Trump - he's now getting pressure from both sides to enact more gun control. And at this point, he's not giving them much. If it were Hillary? With all the pressure right now? I'd be willing to bet the Republicans in congress would bend over, kiss her wrinkly old azz and give her what she wanted.

It's a joke thinking we have many true friends in Washington D.C. I'll remain thankful for anything that blocks more gun control, especially at a time when our former friends are sounding more and more like their Democrat counterparts.

 

[bbbass]

IMHO, a lot of our election funding when awry when the highest court in the land stated corporation(s) can be cosidered indivduals as such can contribute unlimited $$$$$ to those candidate(s) of their choice?

Actually, the ruling said that corporations have First Ammendment rights same as individuals do, and that campaign contributions are a form of expressing freedom of speech. It is incorrect to say that "individuals" can contribute unlimited funding to campaigns as IIRC there is a limit of $2000 for direct contribution, therefore the reason that "bundlers" exist.

It is the way our country's election system has functioned since the founding fathers set up the electoral college in the constitution.

Remember, our first presidents were founding fathers who were wealthy land and slave owners and well known (political activity/leanings) amongst the population from their activities founding this union.

Wow, blanket statement much??

Comfortably middle class to exceedingly wealthy.

(Note: several died in debt; this answer describes their business interests and social rank, not necessarily their lifelong net worth - see Trump, Donald)

There is no single list on who counts as a Founding Father. The term became popular in the 1820s as the last Revolutionary leaders started dying and referred generically to that generation of heroes [1]. Wikipedia offers criteria like Signers of the Declaration and Delegates to the Constitutional Convention, but no set of criteria is authoritative.

That said, we can find traits that apply to 90% of candidates and assume some details about their wealth.

First, they were literate. Colonial America was one of the most educated societies of its time, but literacy wasn't universal, and only the most dedicated communities called it typical. Slaves and indentured servants didn't go to school. Bachelor immigrants who worked as farmhands, lumberjacks, sailors, and other semi-skilled laborers didn't go to school. Women who weren't born rich or in parts of New England likely didn't go to school. Self-taught reading was exceptional.

Literate men had as much of an advantage then as someone savvy with a hot programming language has today. They could stumble unknown and penniless into a large town and probably find a job as a scribe or clerk. Combined with a skilled trade like pewtersmithing or printing, a literate man could to run a business. Combined with a few years of college, he could join an elite profession like a lawyer or a minister.

Which leads to our next point, they were given the means to become skilled professionals.

As far as I know, none of the Founding Fathers came from real poverty. A few had very unstable upbringings, notably Alexander Hamilton, but even he had an education and something of a network to support himself. They all were lucky enough to apprentice some trade, get a degree, or otherwise inherent the capital to be an entrepreneur. Read through the Founding Fathers and you see the same professions pop up: farmer, planter, preacher, lawyer, merchant. Some were soldiers in the French and Indian War; I don't fully understand how the military worked in that era, but officers still needed cash or to know someone to recieve their commissions. All these paths take training and/or start-up money.

Much like today, the really wealthy Founding Fathers had multiple jobs and investments. Everyone thinks of Washington as a planter, but his most lucrative gig (besides marriage) was as a real estate speculator. Franklin, the eternal rock star, had about seventy pursuits even after he was rich.

That said, only a few were born independently wealthy. Don't let revisionists mislead you. Colonial America had many, many grave inequalities, but it was still more egalitarian than just about every similarly-sized society of the time. The Founding Fathers started with what we now call equality of opportunity. They still had to work extraordinarily hard, but the path to economic success was well-marked and available.

In fact, I would argue that experiencing this this financial self-mastery was a large part of what made prosperous colonists start to envy political self-mastery. It's often said a middle class was necessary for the birth of modern democracy.

Ruby, halfway through the presidential campaign Trump announced that he would be taking funds from donors. What is your perceived grievance?

The NRA didn't give money directly to Trump they used money to campaign against candidates that were blatantly anti 2nd ammendment. Additionally, the NRA has the right to support the candidate that will do the most to protect the 2nd ammendment, so it is really a non issue. The REAL discussion should be focused on if our president is doing a good job of preserving those rights or not, and I think we as gun owners are very concerned with what is going on right now, as we should be.

Also the comment about Trump making money off his presidency? What a joke! The amount of media backlash on a daily basis attempting to tarnish his name and reputation is truly disgusting and dishonest. If this were anyone else, you would be concerned about the media hounding them to such an extent, but because he is president he has made these things open to the public. That said, this is the last thing he needed to take upon himself as a businessman, and trust me life for him would be much easier without this political mess that he has to deal with.

Last point, why are you so hateful when it comes to his income? There is nothing wrong with being successful & independant and nobody has a right to someone elses money, period.

^^^ THIS!!!

 

[bbbass]

I love this - the topic is about Trump and the NRA and the proposed laws coming out of the white house. But so far people keep deflecting to Clinton Obama and planned parent hood. There is no doubt that there were finances paid to these groups but we only ever had one president that said he would use only his own money to get elected and now we know that was a lie.

Nope, disagree... this topic is about the proposed plan to reduce gun violence. YOU are the one that brought the NRA into it. So why then, should we not consider fair comparisons of other campaigns?

 

[Colts4me]

Allegedly DJT is working for free but must take $1 to meet federal due consideration provisions.

The amount spent during our election campaigns would sure pay for school lunchs, house and feed a lot of homeless folk, go a long ways to eliminate the student debt burden, as well clean up poverty levels...huh?

Even better would be a potus that cared enoug to bring jobs back to America so we don't have poverty. As poverty declines so does crime and the push for more gun controls. Over 3 million jobs added so far and huge tax cuts, biggest ever.

 

[JRuby]

Ruby, halfway through the presidential campaign Trump announced that he would be taking funds from donors. What is your perceived grievance?

The NRA didn't give money directly to Trump they used money to campaign against candidates that were blatantly anti 2nd ammendment. Additionally, the NRA has the right to support the candidate that will do the most to protect the 2nd ammendment, so it is really a non issue. The REAL discussion should be focused on if our president is doing a good job of preserving those rights or not, and I think we as gun owners are very concerned with what is going on right now, as we should be.

Also the comment about Trump making money off his presidency? What a joke! The amount of media backlash on a daily basis attempting to tarnish his name and reputation is truly disgusting and dishonest. If this were anyone else, you would be concerned about the media hounding them to such an extent, but because he is president he has made these things open to the public. That said, this is the last thing he needed to take upon himself as a businessman, and trust me life for him would be much easier without this political mess that he has to deal with.

Last point, why are you so hateful when it comes to his income? There is nothing wrong with being successful & independant and nobody has a right to someone elses money, period.

You asked me why I hate Trump a fair question. My answer is this and it applies to all candidates republican and democrats and socialist or communist. It just so happens it is Trump right now.
I am not against capitalism I fully support it and engage in it myself. It is what I know. I am however against using ones political pisition to further bank roll their personal funds. If you want to become richer go for it but donr. do it on the backs of the American people. I want a president to do what's good for our country. I want our country to be richer and fuller or greater than ever. Trump in my opinion when he talks about making America great I ask for whom and I keep coming up with Trump and his cronies.

I have some personal beliefs for one a man's word is worth more than money in my eyes. A man's loyalty to his friends a kindness to those less fortunate. In short Trumps values are 180 from mine. I believe that if I tell someone something I will do my very best to keep my word. Trump believes in none of this. His opinion is based on its value to him financially.

I could go on but there is no need. I wish he was a man I could respect he is not.

 

[ma96782]

Trump defends school safety plan that doesn't include raising age to buy guns

Aloha, Mark

 

[justcuz]

Some questions I think are worth considering in the whole NRA funding Trump debate:

1. When did the NRA start spending $$ on the campaign? Before or after he was declared as the Republican nominee? I suspect it was after, but having trouble confirming if that was the case.

2. If it was after, then I wonder, what was the NRA to do? Stay out of the race altogether? At that point, there were no other candidates to back that had an actual chance to win. It was going to be Hillary or Trump, period. So do they support Hillary, or Trump?

3. Is the money truly spent in support of Trump? Or in opposition to Hillary? Either way, the $$ flowing toward Hillary's side at least matched, or as I have heard well exceeded that of Trump's side.

4. Would we have been better of with Hillary as President? Some seem to think so. And if so, does anyone really believe the do-nothing Republicans in congress would have held both houses for her first 4 years? I'm willing to bet it would be going D regardless of the President is - and then we've got 2 unrestrained years of anti-gun Hillary trying to turn us into Australia.

Fact is, the stuff Trump said was just that, words. Most of what's being proposed is far less drastic than folks here and elsewhere led us to believe. The 2nd amendment stands. The question is how much do we lose this time around? Since the Republicans in congress and in some states (FL) are caving, the sole responsibility for this isn't on Trump - he's now getting pressure from both sides to enact more gun control. And at this point, he's not giving them much. If it were Hillary? With all the pressure right now? I'd be willing to bet the Republicans in congress would bend over, kiss her wrinkly old azz and give her what she wanted.

It's a joke thinking we have many true friends in Washington D.C. I'll remain thankful for anything that blocks more gun control, especially at a time when our former friends are sounding more and more like their Democrat counterparts.

your kind attention is directed to post 31 & 34...

As stated this county's election funded changed when the courts allowed corp to be recognized as private entities and the hunt brothers, bloomburg, nra, et., have been giving and swinging elections for years.

As for how life would have been under the Dutchess...look back on the 30+ years she reigned as president ad hoc under bill, as a senator in the gun free state of ny, and as SoS under the last president.

She got defeated, she admitted defeat, she pouted, she wrote about about her woes, but it doesn't change a thing wishing and a hopeing about how life would be if, perhaps if the russians, nra, the mail scandal, the bengazi massacre, pick your reason, She lost, what IFs scenarios are pipe dreams period.

That you fail to recognize the friends in political positions is your problem - but think on this..imagine the country's congress filled to the brim with individuals with Feinstein's outstandling perspective. postulate that prospect!

 

[Provincial]

If the NRA spent $300 million to protect the 2A in 2016, and the NRA claimed 5 million members at that time, I'd say that they were underspending dues for political purposes. $60.00 per member on a 4 year cycle is pretty small, given the threat.

With the 2A under attack at the state level, the NRA should be spending most of membership dues on defending it.

It should be noted that the NRA has an separate entity, the ILA, for political activities. The ILA is the main conduit for spending on elections, and much of its budget comes from donations outside of NRA dues. I suspect that the $300 million figure includes ILA spending from voluntary donations above and beyond NRA dues.

Whatever the structure of the organization, NRA-directed spending is true grass-roots (with some industry money) probably more so than union political activity, since membership is all voluntary.

 

[Colts4me]

 

[nammac]

I love this - the topic is about Trump and the NRA and the proposed laws coming out of the white house. But so far people keep deflecting to Clinton Obama and planned parent hood. There is no doubt that there were finances paid to these groups but we only ever had one president that said he would use only his own money to get elected and now we know that was a lie.

"He has used the presidency to line his and his family's pocket's" those are your words JRuby, I was just feeding them back to you...

You said Trump is using his position to line his and his families pockets... Just like Obama and every president that preceded them...

Truth always hurts...

 

[ma96782]

That's because about half of the $700 million was spent to keep the other person out of the job!

LOL....I'm not ashamed to admit that.....

I voted for the lesser of evils.

Aloha, Mark

Hillary's words.....

 

[JRuby]

"He has used the presidency to line his and his family's pocket's" those are your words JRuby, I was just feeding them back to you...

You said Trump is using his position to line his and his families pockets... Just like Obama and every president that preceded them...

Truth always hurts...

It doesn't hurt neither Hillary or Obama has pulled the sh3t Trump has and right now Hillary and Obama are foot notes in a history book
Yes I truly feel Trump does what he does for Trumps own good not the countries.

 

[nammac]

It doesn't hurt neither Hillary or Obama has pulled the sh3t Trump has and right now Hillary and Obama are foot notes in a history book
Yes I truly feel Trump does what he does for Trumps own good not the countries.

It's been many a year since a sitting president has done what's right for the country... They're all concerned about their political and financial well being, not about us, we're simply collateral damage on their way to fame and fortune... To $150K speaking engagements and writing memoir's.

But then again I'm jaded by the political corruption in this country...

 

[bbbass]

You asked me why I hate Trump a fair question.

I have some personal beliefs for one a man's word is worth more than money in my eyes. A man's loyalty to his friends a kindness to those less fortunate. In short Trumps values are 180 from mine. I believe that if I tell someone something I will do my very best to keep my word. Trump believes in none of this. His opinion is based on its value to him financially.

I could go on but there is no need. I wish he was a man I could respect he is not.

Fair enough answer. But, my thinking is that you have swallowed the Koolaid that the Dems/Libs and the main stream media are shouting. Show me evidence that DJT has further enriched himself off the backs of the populace. Show me evidence that he has not been kind to his fellow man. How can you not be aware of his record of charitable acts and giving? Only because he hasn't touted them, which is proper, and strange given his ego. Has he lied? About campaign promises? Seems to me he hasn't. Everything is going great great great.

Respect him? On a personal level, no. As having done the job of President, a million times yes!!!

You got a bad case of Trump derangement IMO.

 

[Colts4me]

It' good you guys are reminded what you could have had for potus when the media attacks Trump.

 

[bbbass]

neither Hillary or Obama has pulled the sh3t Trump has

Your kidding right?

Hillary and Obama were both Cloward and Piven disciples. They destroyed the balance of power in the Middle East. Hillary's reset enriched her from the Uranium One sale. We are still trying to recover from 8yrs of decline during the Obama presidency. Obama destroyed the coal industry. He furthered our reliance on Middle East and Mexican oil by clamping down on domestic production. Hillary and Obama perverted the FBI and caused the biggest scandal of our lives.

8yrs of Killery would have further devastated the U.S.

 

[nammac]

8 years of Hillary would have seen the demise of America. At least we still have borders...

 

[bbbass]

I gotta leave this thread before I throw up.